Author: Kate Fort

Registration is Now OPEN for ILPC/TICA Conference!!

Kate Fort

Registration is here.

Registration includes continental breakfast and lunch both days, along with the reception on Thursday night at the East Lansing Marriott. We’ve also applied for 10.75 CLEs from the Minnesota State Bar Association, and will provide forms for those seeking credits in other states.

The tentative agenda is here.

If you, your firm, or organization would like to be a conference sponsor, please see the form here for more information, and our deepest thanks for making the conference possible.

Series of Articles on ICWA in the Minnesota Star Tribune

Kate Fort

Part I here.

Part II here.

Charts on the foster care disparities in Minnesota here.

Small piece on Minnesota Indian Women’s Resource Center here.

Tribal Children and Families Program Specialist Job Openings

Kate Fort

Here.

Duties

  • Providing the entire range of services and technical assistance to Tribes and Tribal organizations regarding child welfare grant programs that include but are not limited to titles IV-B and IV-E of the Social Security Act and the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act.
  • Providing advice and consultation to Tribal staff in the development of Tribal plans based on new legislation or Federal policy assuring that the Tribe understands the intent of the Congress, interprets the directives correctly, and covers all pertinent points in its plan.
  • Identifying deficiencies in Tribal program operations using audit, program/financial review, and quality control findings.
  • Negotiating with Tribal agency staff for mutually acceptable changes.
  • Analyzing Tribal grant award requests and expenditure estimates.

Published Decision out of the California Court of Appeals (ICWA Inquiry)

Kate Fort

Here

The father ultimately dropped his appeal of the ICWA inquiry, but the court’s comment is worth noting:

To be sure, the juvenile court’s analysis whether the evidence is sufficient to trigger ICWA’s notice requirements for Andrew and Kailey will be enhanced if additional information concerning Jonathan’s Indian ancestry is presented to the court. But the burden of developing that information is not properly placed on Jonathan alone. Section 224.3, subdivision (a), imposes on child protection agencies, as well as the juvenile court, the affirmative and continuing duty to inquire whether a dependent child is or may be an Indian child. (See In re Kadence P., supra, 241 Cal.App.4th at p. 1386; In re H.B. (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 115, 121; see also Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.481(a).) As soon as practicable, the social worker is required to interview the child’s parents, extended family members, the Indian custodian, if any, and any other person who can reasonably be expected to have information concerning the child’s membership status or eligibility. (§ 224.3, subd. (c); In re Shane G. (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 1532, 1539; Cal. Rules of Court, rule 5.481(a)(4).) From the record presented to us, it appears the Department and the juvenile court failed to satisfy that duty; neither the court nor the Department made any effort to develop additional information that might substantiate Jonathan’s belief he may have Indian ancestry by contacting his siblings or other extended family members. Both federal and state law require more than has been done to date. On remand, an adequate investigation by the Department with a full report to the court must be promptly completed.

Transfer to Tribal Court Case out of the Arizona Court of Appeals

Kate Fort3 Comments

Here.

This decision from last Thursday highlights the 1911(b) explicit transfer provision, which allows for foster care and termination proceedings to be transferred, but is silent on pre-adoptive or adoptive proceedings. The final footnote may provide some guidance in the future:

18  Because the Community sought transfer of jurisdiction only under the authority of 25 U.S.C. § 1911(b), we do not analyze or address the propriety of such a motion under any other authority. See In re Welfare of the Child of R.S. & L.S., 805 N.W.2d at 57 (Dietzen, J., concurring) (“The court’s consideration of those issues is dictum and not binding on the
court.”). See also 2016 BIA Final Rule, 81 Fed. Reg. 38822, J(1), Response to Comment (“Parties may request transfer of preadoptive and adoptive placement proceedings, but the standards for addressing such motions are not dictated by ICWA or these regulations. Tribes possess inherent jurisdiction over domestic relations, including the welfare of child citizens of the Tribe, even beyond that authority confirmed in ICWA. . . . Thus, it may be appropriate to transfer preadoptive and adoptive proceedings involving children residing outside of a reservation to Tribal jurisdiction in particular circumstances.” (citations omitted)); 25 U.S.C. § 1902 (providing a Congressional declaration of policy stating that ICWA establishes “minimum Federal standards for the removal of Indian children from their families and the placement of such children in foster or adoptive homes which will reflect the unique values of Indian culture”).

Article on California’s Report on ICWA (non) Compliance

Kate Fort

Report: Compliance with Indian Child Welfare Act Spotty

The report found that state and local agencies still struggle with the law, according to Kimberly Cluff, a task force member and staff member of the Morongo Band of Mission Indians. She said the tribes feel like they’re at “ground zero.”

“The law provides the tribes and, more importantly, tribal children with a bunch of rights, but if the tribe doesn’t know the child is in foster care, or if nobody asks the question of family tribal status, then all those protections are lost,” Cluff said. “If we don’t know that child is an Indian, we can’t protect them as an Indian and it’s just somewhat shocking that 40 years after the passing of this law, we’re still talking about basic implementation.”

A copy of the Report is here.

VAWA Trial Advocacy Training at Eastern Band, Aug. 24-26

Kate Fort

Agenda and registration here.

Menominee Tribe Legal Services Dept Assistant Tribal Attorney Opening

Kate Fort

The Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin is a federally recognized tribe located in Keshena, Wisconsin.

The Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin Legal Services Department currently seeks an Assistant Tribal Attorney-CS, SS. The ideal candidate will be a dynamic and energetic attorney capable to perform work in child support and child welfare and other projects as assigned. The Assistant Tribal Attorney-CS, SS will work as part of a team to protect and preserve the best interests of Menominee children and families. The position is located in Keshena, Wisconsin. The successful candidate may be eligible for federal Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PLSF) Program.

The position of ASSISTANT TRIBAL ATTORNEY-CS, SS in LEGAL SERVICES with the Menominee Indian Tribe of Wisconsin has been posted beginning 7/28/2016 12:00:00 AM with a Close Date of 8/3/2016 11:59:00 PM.

For more information, this posting can be viewed at http://www.menominee-nsn.gov/Employment/Jobs.aspx